• Cyrus Draegur@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        38
        ·
        edit-2
        14 days ago

        HOLY COW THERE’S DEEP LORE REGARDING FIRE ALARM SYSTEMS?! O.O

        Do you have a favorite fact? Or like, one particular thing about the subject that really surprised you? Do you have a fire alarm system in mind as “the best” or “worst” in terms of performance and detection? :D

        • OwOarchist@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          29
          ·
          14 days ago

          HOLY COW THERE’S DEEP LORE REGARDING FIRE ALARM SYSTEMS?! O.O

          There’s deep lore about pretty much anything, if you’re willing to dig for it.

          • ChexMax@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            12 days ago

            Ugh now that my husband works in fire alarm systems, he has become someone who thinks I would want to learn about them voluntarily. Every flipping building we enter, “ooh, not to be annoying, but look at this! They have xyz!”

            Have you ever noticed the smoke detectors in line at Disney? Because I’ve been forced to. And they must have gotten special permits or something because they’re outside of regular code rules. God bless him.

      • Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        14 days ago

        Actually, I would like that. As soon as I learned about common home fire alarms using radioisotopes to create a gap in an electric circuit that can be closed by ionized smoke particles, I was fascinated. I know there are some fancy ones that use optics instead so the can detect particles of any kind. The heat sensitive ones seem cool for cooking areas so there are fewer false alarms. I imagine by now there are ones thats use FLIR/thermal cameras.

        All that is just detection. Even the communication is really cool. The loud beeping sound is simple but effective. I like the ones that release a spicy mist to wake deaf people. Flashing lights go without saying. Then there’s networked alarms. Do they go straight to the Fire Department or are they like security systems that get filtered by a third party first?

        The auto-response features (if that’s what they’re called) like fire sprinklers are interesting also. I read that they typically release dirty water because it’s been sitting in the pipes for so long. Sure, dirty water is hardly an issue during a fire. It could be raw sewage and still be better than nothing. Still, I wonder why they’re not on a loop integrated with the rest of the fresh water system. The advanced response systems like halon are kinda scary. Probably not something I’ll see in my lifetime. I’m sure it’s better than the alternative, though. The foam for airplane hangers is pretty neat. Wouldn’t want to be in there, though.

        I wonder what the cutting edge stuff is now.

        • Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          13 days ago

          I’ve worked on inert gas systems before, they’re pretty scary, because if you screw up, it can be tens of thousands of dollars of gas dumped.

          Sprinkler systems typically use steel pipe, which isn’t safe for drinking water, which is why the water smells like rusty ass.

      • Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        14 days ago

        I wanna hear about maglev trains in evacuated tunnels. I know it’s a fantasy because of the costs, but I like to imagine it could be real.

        Maglev in general is cool, too. At least they’re real. They’re still heavily limited by costs, though.

        I’ll absolutely listen to anything about high-speed rail in general.

        That failing, I’m good with standard-gauge , passenger rail, too.

        • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          14 days ago

          Wasn’t that Musks failed hyperloop thing?

          I do have to admit the idea is pretty cool though. Not sure how they could be used practically for anything that would justify the cost though. Like cargo transit? At least then you can cut more safety requirements compared to human passengers. But then you have the question of why go to that effort to move cargo faster than a train anyway

          • Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            13 days ago

            Yeah, although as with most things Musky, the concept was already musty by that point. His particular talent seems to be getting other people to spend their own time and money on his pet projects.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vactrain

            I think you hit the nail on the head, and I would guess that cheap, ubiquitous access to high-bandwith telecom, and improved air transit probably displaced a lot of the potential demand for long-disrance, passenger rail transport. Standard rail is already cheap for cargo.

            I don’t think we’ll see a serious revisitation of the concept until population density and environmental damage make air travel less appealing and economical.

            Having said that, and despite it’s many problems, maglev vactrains come with a bunch of cool stuff and could be potentially cheaper per mile traveled than current rail (obviously the upfront, per-mile cost of track is orders of magnitude higher).

            1. NYC to LA in about an hour (if they’re still above sea level by that point).

            2. Underground, so cooling is cheaper, and it leaves more space on the surface, fewer traffic crossings, etc.

            3. Electric power, which will probably be even cheaper by that time, if it ever comes.

            4. Massive utility conduits. You already built a big-ass tunnel spanning a continent. Why not add water, power, and data conduits for a relatively small additional cost?

            5. Very few moving parts. Potentially less maintenance that standard rail, albeit more than surface maglev. This also makes it more amenable to automation, allowing for individual cars/carriages to travel. This means being able to offer several trips per hour rather than per day with a similar or even better occupancy.

            Anyway, that’s just my fantasy, but at this point, I might as well wish for a flying unicorn.

            • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              13 days ago

              The vast majority of a long distance railway goes through land with fuck all value. Some cows might be annoyed by the rails taking space from their field but that is about it. It’s only the end part in a city where you may want to save space by putting it underground.

              • Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                13 days ago

                Can’t argue with that. I would happily support conventional, surface, high-speed, passenger rail. If some cows get annoyed in the process, that’s just a nice little bonus. They know what they did.